Apparatus and method for displaying records responsive to a database query

ABSTRACT

An apparatus and method for simultaneously displaying both record names and the associated files responsive to a user&#39;s search over a database. A user conducts a routine search query over a database or group of databases of records containing, for example, text documents, or alphabetical concordances thereof. The search engine returns a list of records responsive to the user&#39;s query. In contrast to the standard list of record identifiers, the apparatus displays both the identifiers and selected portions of those records or other useful information, as defined by the user, facilitating quick review. The user is able to sort the list of these responsive records in a variety of ways, either before the search, or within the list of results, to expedite review. The apparatus identifies records that have been reviewed previously by marking them as “viewed” links. Finally, when reviewing any responsive record in full, the complete list of records is displayed in a side panel, in a way that still allows resorting by the user. This side panel display may be re-sorted “on the fly.” It also allows the user to see the identifiers of records anywhere in the list, and to easily jump, such as with a single mouse click, to any record in the list.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 to provisionalapplication No. 60/164,549, filed Nov. 10, 1999, the entirety of whichis incorporated herein by reference. This application also relates toco-pending application Ser. No. 09/707,911, filed on even date herewith,entitled “Improved Relevance Sorting for Database Searches,” theentirety of which is incorporated herein by reference.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention pertains to the field of computerized informationsearch, display, and retrieval systems and methods. More particularly,the present invention relates to an apparatus and method of expeditingthe review of records responsive to such a search, by more efficientlydisplaying, representing, sorting, and navigating such responsiverecords.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

For centuries, researchers have pored over books, reading document afterdocument to inform their knowledge of a certain field. These searchesare time-consuming and cumbersome, frequently involving the review ofdocuments that are not on point failure to locate relevant documents.With the advent of computers, companies have created searchabledatabases of research materials. In a computerized search, the userenters a search query, usually using “keywords” or Boolean search terms,and is given a list of documents in the database that meet therequirements of the search. The user can then review responsivedocuments, search within that subset of responsive documents, or conductanother query. Research of this sort generally takes place on a localcomputer system, on compact discs or other storage devices, over adial-up modem connection, and more recently via the Internet.

Research materials can comprise files in various formats, fromunstructured strings of characters, sentences, or text files, to veryhighly structured data. They can be of a wide variety of data classes,such as words, numbers, graphics, etc. In other cases, the researchmaterials might be contained, for example, in a database. A simpledatabase might be comprised of a single file containing many records,each of which contains the same set of content elements (sometimesreferred to as fields, items, etc.) where each content element is acertain fixed width and a certain format. More complex databases oftencontain a large number of files, with each file itself containing many,many records of both fixed and variable-width content elements in avariety of formats. One great advantage of searching databases bycomputer is that the user may determine how broadly or narrowly toconduct searches, allowing the user, to a certain extent, to control thenumber of responsive records. This is especially helpful becauseresearchers, to be thorough, frequently must review each responsiverecord, often numbering in the hundreds or thousands. One example ofthis type of text retrieval system is Anglo-Dutch conglomerateReed-Elsevier's “Lexis/Nexis” system.

Despite great advances in computer-assisted research, reviewingresponsive records remains time consuming, inefficient, and dreadfullydull. Searches yield sets of responsive records that are bothunderinclusive and overinclusive—queries do not return important recordsthat are not literally responsive to a user's Boolean request, and theyoften return irrelevant records that are incidentally responsive to auser's query. In order to tell whether a query was well formulated,researchers must often review, one record at a time, scores ofresponsive records. In a long list of records, the user may be requiredto review all responsive records in order to guarantee thecomprehensiveness of the research assignment. Many times, reviewingrecords responsive to a query is akin to looking for a needle in ahaystack.

A further disadvantage with typical computerized research systems isthat search engines will return a list of only the titles or otheridentifiers of responsive records, which tells very little about thecontents of those records. To view in full a record in the list, theuser must use a mouse or other pointing device to click on a link in thelist, which takes the user to the beginning of that individual record.The user can either skip sequentially from record to record, through theentire list of records, in the order they were listed, or jump back andforth between individual records and a list of identifiers. For a userto skip several records ahead or back in the list, she must eitherreview all the records in between, or return to the list of identifiersand click a separate link. Review of results involves a lot of togglingback and forth between a list of responsive records and the full body ofthe records themselves, and especially with slow connections to theInternet, this can be time consuming.

A further disadvantage of current computerized research systems is thatusers frequently retrieve the same records, over and over, in subsequentsearches. One common problem is illustrated by the following scenario.Assume that a user conducts a search over the database of researchmaterials, yielding 80 results. The user reads all 80 records anddecides that she did not find a record responsive to her needs. The userthen reformulates the query, to which the search engine returns 50responsive records. Unable to remember all the titles of the 80 recordsalready reviewed, the user must then read through all 50 recordsreturned by the second query, even records she has already reviewed.

Therefore, what is needed is an apparatus and method for expeditingcomputerized research by allowing users to view more information aboutresponsive records in a summary fashion. This would allow users to view,in a list of responsive records, both the record identifier, as well ascertain portions, fields or elements of those records, as determined bythe user. Researchers then more easily could skim a list of responsiverecords to determine whether they are important to the research task athand. The apparatus would further allow users to change the type orlength of fields or elements that are listed, either at the time of thequery or while reviewing the list of results. Furthermore, when a userreviews a record in full, the apparatus would display the list ofresponsive records in a “side panel,” so that the user could re-sort thelist “on the fly,” or jump effortlessly several records forward or backin the list of responsive records.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In view of the problems associated with digital search and retrievalsystems, the present invention advantageously expedites computerizedresearch by providing an apparatus and method for displaying,representing, sorting, and navigating responsive records.

The present invention also provides a mechanism for displaying a list ofrecords responsive to a user's search that includes user-definedportions of responsive records. Providing more information in a list ofresponsive records reduces the need to access the full text of recordsin order to determine whether the record is relevant to the user'sresearch.

The invention also reduces the user's need to switch back and forthbetween lists of identifiers of responsive records and the full body ofthose records, by displaying fields or other portions of the records inthe list of responsive records along with the record identifiers, and bydisplaying the list of responsive records (e.g., by displaying theiridentifiers) along with the display of a portion of any responsiverecord, such as displaying the record in full.

The invention advantageously expedites review of responsive records,both by allowing users to sort the list of such records, and by showingusers which records they have already reviewed. This may also beachieved by listing identifiers for responsive records in a side panelwhile the user reviews any responsive record in full. This allows theuser to select different records or to jump forward or back a number ofrecords at a time by clicking on the identifiers. This also allows usersto re-sort the list of responsive records in the side panel.

One embodiment of the present invention provides a method for displayingrecords responsive to a database query comprising the steps of: (i)displaying a list of identifiers for a plurality of responsive records;and (ii) displaying selected elements of at least one of the responsiverecords, wherein the list of identifiers and selected elements aredisplayed simultaneously.

In yet another embodiment, an apparatus for displaying recordsresponsive to a database query is presented. The apparatus comprisesmeans for displaying a list of responsive records, and means fordisplaying selected elements of at least one of the responsive records,wherein the list of identifiers and selected elements are displayedsimultaneously.

In other aspects of the present invention, an apparatus and a method forexpediting legal research, in computerized searches of legal materials,including without limitation judicial opinions, statutes, regulations,regulatory decisions, Security and Exchange Commission filings, briefs,pleadings, docket entries, treatises, articles, and other law-relatedinformation, are provided.

In yet another aspect of the present invention, information retrievedfrom searches over databases of subsequent history information for suchlegal materials is displayed in user-defined lists. This embodimentincludes displaying a list of document titles in a side panel whileviewing the full text of any document returned by the search. In afurther aspect of the present invention, a list of the titles ofresponsive records, as well as user-defined portions of those records,are displayed. In yet a further aspect of the present invention, theresponsive records whose identifiers, title, or other content elementsare to be displayed, are identified by use of an apparatus that uses thesearching and sorting methods described below.

Typically, although not necessarily, the present invention isimplemented along with, or as part of, a computerized information searchand retrieval system. The user conducts a search by selecting a databaseand parameters for the search (including, for example, date or fieldrestrictions), then enters a Boolean or other search query. The userthen selects display preferences, such as how she wants to sort theresponsive records and what portions of those records (if any) should bedisplayed in the list. The computer system performs a search of adatabase and/or associated alphabetical concordance and returns a listof records that are responsive to the user's search.

The search of the database may be done by standard methods, such asstandard Boolean searching. Alternatively, or in addition, the searchmay be modified or replaced with other kinds of searches, such asnatural language searches. These alternative searches may return recordsthat would not normally be responsive to a Boolean search. In anotherembodiment, a standard Boolean search might be followed by an “extendedreference search.” The extended reference search begins by checkingwhich documents are referenced by those returned by the standard Booleansearch. Any document referenced by more than a predetermined percentage,e.g., 15% in a preferred embodiment, of the responsive documents, isthen added to the search result even if it is not originally part of thesearch result. This process may be repeated recursively.

In another class of embodiments, the results of prior searches, eitherby the same user, by similar users, or by all users, are tracked. In oneembodiment, the number of times a record is returned by a search forgiven terms or keywords is recorded in a table or array in a manner inwhich the number is linked to the search terms or keywords. Using thistable or array, it is possible to perform a search of a database byreturning records that were frequently returned by other similarsearches (e.g., those using the same or similar terms or keywords)without actually performing a Boolean search. In another embodiment, theresults of similar searches are used to supplement the results ofperforming a standard Boolean search. In another embodiment, the tableor array of similar results is used to modify the relevance of records.If a record is found with high frequency on that table, its relevancescore is increased, affecting the position in which it, its identifier,or some other element, will be displayed. All of the embodimentsinvolving the array or table containing counts of the number of timeseach record is returned by similar searches may be enhanced by trackinginstances in which the record was not only returned as responsive to asearch, but also was selected by the user. In this embodiment, forexample, the search would be counted in the table or array only if theuser actually printed, downloaded, or read the record in full.

Some of the advantages of the non-Boolean search features of the presentinvention are illustrated in the preferred embodiment of a legalresearch system. Here, the user searches, for example, judicial opinionsfor certain terms or keywords. In one embodiment, a Boolean search isfirst performed, returning a set of opinions. The search engine thenchecks each opinion to determine which other documents are referenced bythose opinions. In another embodiment, rather than using a searchengine, a table or array is used to store a list of all references byeach document, to each document, or both. Then, any document referencedby 15% of the documents in the initial search result are added to thesearch result. The process may be repeated over the new set ofdocuments. The number of references to each document may also be used indetermining its relevance and the position where each document or itscitation may be displayed. For example, any documents cited by more than50% of the search result may be placed ahead of those only cited by 30%of the search result. In another embodiment, the percentage of documentsciting each document is only one relevance factor, combined with othermeasures of relevance to allow sorting. In another embodiment, a tableis constructed with all or most search words or keywords. Then, eachtime a search is performed with those words or keywords, the results areadded to the table with those words or keywords. In another embodiment,the records are only recorded in the table when a user accesses thedocument, for example to download or print it. However constructed, thistable is used to identify documents that other users have found to beimportant for certain terms or keywords. If a user searches for “breach”and “contract,” for example, the documents that appear most often underthese terms (or only those that appear most often under both terms) canbe returned, either as an independent search result or as a supplementto a standard Boolean search result. The number of times a givendocument has been found responsive to similar searches can also be usedas a measure of relevance, either alone or in combination with anotherrelevance index.

Preferably, the system then displays a list of responsive recordsaccording to the user's preferences. For the preferred embodiment of adisplay of a list of responsive legal documents, the list may include,for example, any combination of the following elements: a descriptivetitle of each document, its docket number, citation, source, authorship,date information, a search relevance ranking, as well as any text theuser elected to display. Displayed text could include, by way of exampleand not limitation, the first paragraph of the document, the first 50words of the document, the first n lines of the document (where n is aninteger), the paragraph of the document most relevant to the search, orno text at all.

Relevance is computed as a function of the frequency of appearance ofthe search terms and their proximity. For example, in one preferredembodiment, records that have a higher frequency of search terms areconsidered more relevant than those with a lower frequency. In anotherpreferred embodiment, extra weight is given to records that contain allor most of the search terms, even if the absolute frequency is lower. Ina further preferred embodiment, the number of words between each searchterm and the nearest search term is computed. Records that have a higherfrequency of pairs of search terms with few words between them aredeemed more relevant that those with lesser proximity between them. Inanother preferred embodiment, frequency and proximity are combined.

For example, assume there are three documents, 1, 2, and 3, found by aBoolean search for three search terms, A, B, and C. Assume the documentshave the following frequencies and proximities:

Document 1: A at positions 2, 76, 756, 767, 4956, and 95654.

Document 2: A at 2 and 6, B at 3 and 9, C at 17

Document 3: A at 2 B at 877 and C at 8604

If simple frequency is the measure of relevance, document 1 is the mostrelevant with six search terms, then documents 2 and 3. If doubleweighting is given for occurrences of all three search terms, 2 is themost relevant, with 1 and 3 tied for second most relevant. Usingproximity, document 2 is the most relevant because the first A and thefirst B are adjacent, the second A and second B are 3 apart, and thelast B and first C are 8 apart. If an index is created by summing theproximity of the nearest three pairs, the index for document 3 is 12.For document 1, the index is 775 and for document 3 there are not enoughpairs to evaluate proximity. In order of relevance, the documents aresorted 2, 1, 3. Frequency and proximity may be combined in a variety ofways. For example, they both can be applied separately and the resultsaveraged. Alternately, the proximity index can be normalized to thegreatest frequency of search terms found in any record and then added tothe frequency.

The user could scroll up and down the list, reviewing both the titles(or other identifiers of responsive records) and the relevant portionsof those documents. The user could re-sort the list on the fly, by anyinformation in the list. She could also change the amount or type oftext, fields, or other portions of records displayed in the list. Thisallows the user, at a glance and without accessing the documents infull, to better evaluate the usefulness of her query, and to evaluatewhich records are important to the research task at hand moreefficiently.

The display also may allow the user to determine which records, if any,have been returned by prior searches or that have been selected by theuser, for example, for printing. To do this, a running list of records,identified by their unique identifier, is preserved and associated withthe user's unique ID. When a subsequent set of records is to bedisplayed, the identifiers of those records are checked against thepreserved list to find the repeated documents. Repeated records areidentified in the display, for example, by making their identifier'sbold or of a different color. Similarly, if the user selects thedocument, for example by clicking on its identifier or by printing it,that document's identifier is added to a different list which is alsoassociated with the user's ID. The identifier's of new records to bedisplayed are also checked against this list to determine those alreadyselected. They are displayed in a different fashion, for example byusing a different color, boldness, or a special icon.

Typically, the user selects any document on the list, using inputdevices such as a mouse, keyboard, stylus, microphone, or otherselection device. For the preferred embodiment where the system ormethod of displaying records is combined with a search to first identifythose records, the computer system then displays the full record withsearch terms highlighted therein. The user can jump from term to term,page to page, or field to field, or element to element, within a record,or jump from one record to the next using, for example, navigation keys.In addition, the system displays a list of the titles of all responsiverecords in a side panel. This list may be re-sorted on the fly, and theuser may scroll up and down the list of responsive records, independentof the individual record being displayed. Using the methods describedabove, the user can select any record in the side panel—includingrecords several places ahead or behind the displayed record in thecomplete list—and the system will display the selected record in full(or in part), with the complete list of responsive records in a sidepanel.

In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the database ishighly structured using XML tagging. This permits ready identificationof all elements, fields and other unique portions of each record, suchas the record identifier. XML-identified content is then used in thedisplays in a variety of ways, including to identify the records.

Another preferred embodiment of the invention is to apply it to legaldatabases of cases, statutes, regulations, and administrative opinions.This embodiment is illustrated in the drawings. The steps in all methodsmay be performed in any order, unless expressly stated otherwise.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention is illustrated by way of example, and not by wayof limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings and in whichlike reference numerals refer to similar elements and in which:

FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a window displayed on aCRT or other display, which can be used as a user interface for thepresent invention, including a search dialog box.

FIG. 2 illustrates a list of records returned by the user's search,including several sorting, display, and navigation features.

FIG. 3 illustrates the display of the full text of a responsive record,along with a side panel including the list of titles of the returnedrecords.

FIG. 4 illustrates a flow diagram for a query in one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram of options provided to a user by oneembodiment of the invention after a query is performed.

FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram of one embodiment of the inventionafter responsive records are displayed in part or in full.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

An apparatus and method are described for displaying records. In thepreferred embodiment, such apparatus and method are combined with anapparatus and method for expediting legal research by displaying,representing, sorting, and navigating text files identified by a searchengine. In the following description, for the purposes of explanation,numerous specific details such as mathematical formulae, algorithms,menus, and the like are set forth in order to provide the best mode ofthe present invention. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled inthe art that the present invention may be practiced without thesespecific details, and is not limited to the specific details shown anddescribed. In other instances, well known structures and devices areshown in block diagram form to more clearly set forth the presentinvention.

FIG. 1 shows a search screen or window 100, as may be displayed on aCRT, as an example of one possible user interface for the query screenon a research system. A user first selects a database or group ofdatabases on which to conduct a search 103, for example, cases of theU.S. Supreme Court. The user then delimits the search using such factorsas date restrictions 104, and then enters either a Boolean text search106, a field search within the database 105, or a combination of thetwo.

Before or after conducting the search, the user may customize the listof records that will be returned, including how the results of thesearch will be organized and what information the system will returnabout each record. She may select fields by which to sort results on thesearch screen 100, such as the date of the record, the relevance of therecord to the search, or by which database the record came from 101. Theuser may sort first by one criteria, then break ties using second- andthird-order sorting fields. So, for example, if the user chose to sortby “Court Hierarchy,” then by “Date,” then by “Search Relevance,” thesystem would display documents issued by the highest court first, forexample from the U.S. Supreme Court. Supreme Court documents would befurther sorted in date order, and cases from the same date would belisted in order of relevance. In the preferred embodiment, instead ofcustomizing the sort order, a user could also use the system default.

The system also allows the user to decide how many records to list perpage in the list of returned records 107. The user may select a smallernumber of records to display on each web page, for example, to speed theloading time of the web page. Conversely, the user may select a largenumber so that she can view all the returned records without having tolink to another page. Finally, the user may customize what kind of textor other portions of the record will be displayed in the list ofreturned records 102. For example, with text documents, the user mayselect the first 6 lines of the document, the first 12 lines of thedocument, the first paragraph of the document, the most relevant passageor paragraph from the document, or no text at all. In one embodiment,the user then conducts the query by selecting “Search” 107.

In one preferred embodiment of the invention, it is combined with asearch engine that searches the selected database and returns auser-customized screen 200 listing responsive records, which isillustrated in FIG. 2. For each responsive record, the system lists, forexample, a document title or other identifier 210, which is hyperlinkedto the full record. Each entry also may display information thatidentifies the record, its source, date, and a relevance score for thequery, as well as selected text or other portions of the record itself201. Records previously viewed by the user would be identified as such,for example, either through the use of text, icons, or display of therecord identifier as a “viewed hyperlink,” using, for example, either adifferent color for the identifier, or the browser default for viewedhyperlinks. In a preferred embodiment, records that appeared in aprevious list of responsive records, but which were not selected for afull-text view, are identified as such, either with text, an icon, or bythe use of a different color for the hyperlinked identifier. Thus theuser can avoid duplication of effort, by choosing not to view records infull that she has already reviewed. She would also be able to identifyrecords added to the list after she modified a search query or conducteda new search with different terms.

As requested by the user, the system will display a certain number ofrecords per page 202, as well as a link the user can use to jump to thenext n records in the list 203. This display allows the user to scrollthrough the list of records in whatever order is most helpful in thesearch. The display of text or other portions of each record reduces theamount of time and effort spent by the user switching back and forthbetween screens trying to discern whether a given document is importantto the research being conducted. Because the user can customize and viewtext or other portions of records in the list, she has more informationon the list screen, allowing her to avoid reading records that aredemonstrably unimportant or demonstrably irrelevant, based on a readingof the displayed portion.

In one preferred embodiment, the user can re-sort the document list onthe fly, either by clicking any of the headers 204, in this example“Case,” “Court,” “Date,” or “Relevance.” Clicking “Date,” for example,would re-sort the records in descending order of the record's issuedate. The user could also re-sort the list using the sorting options inthe side panel 205, which offers the same multi-level sorting options asthe search query screen 101.

From the list of displayed cases in FIG. 2, the user can also change thenumber of records displayed per page 206 and the amount and type of textor other portions of the record to display in the list 207, the sameoptions offered in the search query screen in 107 and 102. When the userhas selected new display properties, she presses “Resort” 208, and thesystem re-sorts the list. These sorting and re-sorting options allow theuser to review the list of responsive records moreefficiently—especially when the list is long, or when the user islooking for a specific document. Re-sorting allows the user tomanipulate the list to bring important records to the top, using any ofa number of different sorting algorithms. The user can conduct a newsearch (“N”), modify the current search query (“M”), or search withinthe displayed results (“R”) by clicking the appropriate button 209 forthose tasks. The user may also decide to sort the results by othersorting mechanisms, such as the extended reference search methoddescribed above by clicking similar buttons or choosing differentoptions in a tab.

In order to view any record in the list in full (or to view an expandedportion of any record), the user would click the hyperlinked identifierof the record. The system would then display the record in full, asillustrated in FIG. 3. One section of the screen would display the fullrecord itself 301. The user can navigate the text using a standardbrowser scroll bar, by using a keyboard to move the cursor within therecord, or by way of navigation buttons 305–307. By using “Term”navigation buttons 305, the user can jump from search term to searchterm within the document 305. Similarly, by using “Page” navigationbuttons 306, the user can jump ahead or back one page at a time.Finally, the user can use the “Case” or “Document” navigation buttons307 to jump one record forward or back in the list of responsiverecords. During this process, no matter what part of the record the useris viewing, the record's title or other identifier and citationinformation appear in a navigation bar 308 at the bottom of the screen.

A section of the display screen, depicted as panel 302 in FIG. 3, isused to display a list of responsive records 302. The list displays inthe same order as it last appeared in the record list in FIG. 2, thatis, before the user selected the full text or other portion of a recordon the list. The user may scroll through this list independently of thefull text or other portion of a record from within the list. The titleof the displayed record will appear highlighted within the list in thisside panel. This allows the user to view the list of responsive recordswithout returning to the full list, and greatly facilitates navigationof the list. For example, the user could select to view the full text ofa record five titles down the list by scrolling down and selecting thehyperlinked title or other identifier of that record, without having togo back to the complete list of responsive records. This reduces thetransaction time of the standard mode of reviewing records in the list.

As with the responsive record list illustrated in FIG. 2, the preferredembodiment identifies records previously viewed by the user, eitherthrough the use of text, icons, or display of the title as a “viewedhyperlink,” using either a different color for the title or identifier,or the browser default for viewed hyperlinks. Again, records thatappeared in a previous list of responsive records, but which were notselected for a full-text view, can be identified as such, either withtext, an icon, or by the use of a different color for the hyperlinkedtitle.

The user has the option of re-sorting the list on the fly from the fullrecord text screen of FIG. 3. By selecting the “Re-sort” tab 303, theuser is given all of the same multi-level sorting options from thesearch query screen 101, and from the screen listing the responsiverecord 200. This facilitates review of recording the list, allowing theuser to full the most helpful records to the top of the list, withouthaving to go back to the full list of responsive records illustrated inFIG. 2.

Finally, from the full text view illustrated in FIG. 3, the user has aseries of navigation options. She may return to the full list ofresponsive records illustrated in FIG. 2 by selecting a button option304. She may also conduct a new search, modify her existing query, orsearch within the results by selecting one of those button options 309,similar to the options 209 in the list of responsive records illustratedin FIG. 2.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of the steps involvedin a simple search of a database as part of this invention. First, instep 401, the user formulates and enters a query. The query may use keywords or phrases and be constructed using Boolean logic. The user maythen select the databases in which the search will run, for example, theU.S. Supreme Court, or the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (step 402).Next, the user selects the amount of text to be displayed for eachresponsive document in the list of responsive documents. See step 403.The user may also select the sort order for responsive documents (step404). Documents can be sorted, for example, by court hierarchy, date,and relevance, in any order. The user may also select more advanceddocument sorting options. Alternatively, the user may skip steps 402,403, and 404, instead relying on default values.

The user then submits the query, and the system judges whether or notthe query is well-formed (e.g., if the query is a Boolean search,whether the syntax is correct; alternatively, whether the user selectedat least one database to search over) in step 405. If the query is notwell-formed, the system returns an error message in step 406, thendisplays the query for editing in step 407. If the search iswell-formed, the system queries the relevant database or look-up tableassociated with selected database in step 408. If one or more responsiverecords is not found via step 409, the query is again displayed forediting when processing is returned to step 407, perhaps with a messageindicating that no responsive records were found. If responsive recordsdo exist, the system selects text from each responsive record by defaultor as defined by user, as shown in step 410.

Next, the system sorts the responsive records by a default method or bya method defined by the user in step 411. Subsequently, the systemdisplays the sorted list of records and, if requested by user orrequired by a default rule, an amount of text from each document. Seestep 412. The user then reviews the list (shown as step 413) and decidesif the documents returned are sufficiently germane to the research topic(step 414). If the documents are germane, the user reviews the fullrecords list in step 415. If not, the user may choose either (i) tomodify the query, as shown in step 417, in which case the systemdisplays the last query for editing and accepts editing commands, step407, or (ii) to begin a new search, as shown in step 416, wherein thesystem displays a blank search page and the process begins anew in step401.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating an embodiment of steps after a userhas chosen to view a record list resulting from a search, as shown instep 415. First, in step 501 the system compares the responsive recordswith records that the user has previously reviewed, if any. Next, thesystem displays a sorted list of responsive records, clearly markingrecords that the user has viewed before, and user-defined text (if any).See step 502. The user then decides in step 503 if the list is sorted ina helpful way. If not, the user may, as shown in step 504, select newsort criteria from a supplied list and click page header to re-sort. Thesystem then re-sorts the records in step 505 and displays them in anupdated list (step 502).

If the method of sorting is satisfactory, the user must then decidewhether or not the displayed text is useful. See step 506. If the userdetermines that it is not, the user selects a new text type to displayin step 507. Continuing with this scenario, the system extracts thenewly selected text from responsive records in step 508 and againdisplays the sorted list of responsive records, identifying records thatthe user has previously viewed, and user-defined text (if any) in step502. If, alternately, the displayed text is acceptable, the user decidesif the listed records are sufficiently germane to the research in step509. If not, the user may start a new query as shown in step 510, ormodify the current query, step 511, returning to the steps in FIG. 4 ineither case. The user also may consider whether the percentage ofgermane records is sufficiently high. If it is not, the user may returnto FIG. 4 and further limit the search by conducting a query onresponsive records only, as shown by step 513. If the percentage issufficiently high, the user browses through the list of responsiverecords and text in step 514.

Next, the user may choose to print a record, or view a record, or both,in any order. The user may print a record by selecting it in the list instep 515. The system then displays the formatted record to the user instep 516, and the user confirms the print in step 517. Alternately, theuser may choose to view a full record in step 518, in which case thesystem displays the full record, without special formatting, shown instep 519. This scenario is illustrated in FIG. 6.

FIG. 6 illustrates an embodiment of the steps taken after a user opts todisplay a full record. In the main window, the system displays theselected record in step 601. The system also compares responsive recordswith records previously viewed by the user in step 602, and displays asorted list of responsive records, identifying which of the records havebeen viewed previously (for example, by displaying their headings indifferent colors), and user-defined text (if any) in the side panel. Seestep 603. The user can interact with the system through either window.Through the main window, which displays the text of the selected record(see step 601), the user may:

-   -   Jump to the next or previous appearance of a search term (step        604).    -   Jump to the next or previous record in sequence (step 605).    -   Jump to the next or previous page within a record (step 606).    -   Print the unformatted record (step 607).    -   elect formatted printing option (step 608), causing the system        to display formatted record, as shown in step 609. The user then        confirms the print order which is then executed. See step 610.

From the list of responsive records in the side panel, the user may (i)decide that the listed records are not sorted in a helpful way (step615), or (ii) decide that the listed records are not germane to research(step 611). In the first case, the user may either (i) click header tore-sort as in step 616, or (ii) select new sort criteria from the listin the side panel as in step 617.

If the user decides that the listed records are not germane to researchat step 611, in one embodiment three options are presented: (i) the usermay further limit search by conducting a query on responsive records(step 612); (ii) the user may modify the current query (step 613); or(iii) the user may start a new query (step 614).

The present invention has been disclosed and described herein in what isconsidered to be its most preferred embodiments. It should be noted thatvariations and equivalents may occur to those skilled in the art uponreading the present disclosure and that such variations and equivalentsare intended to come within the scope of the invention and the appendedclaims.

1. A method for displaying records responsive to a database query wherethe records are characterized by having identifiers and content elementscomprising the steps of: performing said database query to selectrecords from a database; displaying a list of identifiers for at leasttwo of said records; displaying, simultaneously with said step ofdisplaying said list of identifiers, content elements of at least one ofthe records; and identifying records responsive to said database querythat were displayed in their entirety in a prior database query.
 2. Themethod of claim 1, wherein said responsive records are identified withtext.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein said responsive records areidentified with icons.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said responsiverecords are identified with color.
 5. The method of claim 1, whereinsaid responsive records are identified with a browser viewed linkdesignation.
 6. An apparatus for displaying records responsive to adatabase query where the records are characterized by having identifiersand content elements comprising: means for performing said databasequery to select records from a database; means for displaying a list ofidentifiers for at least two of said records; means for displaying,simultaneously with display of said list of identifiers, contentelements of at least one of the records; and means for identifyingrecords responsive to said database query that were displayed in theirentirety in a prior database query.
 7. The apparatus of claim 6 whereinsaid identifying means comprises text.
 8. The apparatus of claim 6wherein said identifying means comprises an icon.
 9. The apparatus ofclaim 6 wherein said identifying means comprises colored text.
 10. Theapparatus of claim 6 wherein said identifying means comprises a viewedlink designation.
 11. An apparatus for displaying records responsive toa database query where the records are characterized by havingidentifiers and content elements comprising: means for performing saiddatabase query to select records from a database; means for displaying alist of identifiers for at least two of said records; means fordisplaying, simultaneously with display of said list of identifiers,content elements of at least one of the records; and means foridentifying records responsive to said database query that were selectedin a prior database query.
 12. The apparatus of claim 11 wherein saididentifying means comprises text.
 13. The apparatus of claim 11 whereinsaid identifying means comprises an icon.
 14. The apparatus of claim 11wherein said identifying means comprises colored text.
 15. The apparatusof claim 11 wherein said identifying means comprises a viewed linkdesignation.